Woodford Green resident Bob Crow dies aged 52

Woodford Green resident and Rail Maritime and Transport union general secretary Bob Crow has died at the age of 52

Woodford Green resident and Rail Maritime and Transport union general secretary Bob Crow has died at the age of 52

First published in News
Last updated
East London and West Essex Guardian Series: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter - Wanstead & Woodford

Bob Crow, the general secretary of the Rail Maritime and Transport union (RMT), has died at the age of 52.

A statement on RMT's website confirmed Mr Crow, who lived in Woodford Green, died in the early hours of this morning.

It added: "The union's offices will be closed for the rest of the day and the union will make further announcements in due course."

Mr Crow was elected general secretary of the RMT in 2002.

Comments (44)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:39am Tue 11 Mar 14

TTMAN says...

Now maybe we can have driverless trains.
Now maybe we can have driverless trains. TTMAN
  • Score: -9

11:05am Tue 11 Mar 14

SillyCnut says...

TTMAN wrote:
Now maybe we can have driverless trains.
that's not nice. Much as I also disliked him, he was a human being and deserves that respect.
[quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: Now maybe we can have driverless trains.[/p][/quote]that's not nice. Much as I also disliked him, he was a human being and deserves that respect. SillyCnut
  • Score: 6

11:07am Tue 11 Mar 14

Paul Skinner says...

TTMAN wrote:
Now maybe we can have driverless trains.
We would've anyway. He was just trying to get everything he could while he still could.
[quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: Now maybe we can have driverless trains.[/p][/quote]We would've anyway. He was just trying to get everything he could while he still could. Paul Skinner
  • Score: -2

11:45am Tue 11 Mar 14

TTMAN says...

Ne forte obliviscaris, aliae PRO CAUSIS
Ne forte obliviscaris, aliae PRO CAUSIS TTMAN
  • Score: -5

12:19pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Villagecranberry says...

TTMAN wrote:
Now maybe we can have driverless trains.
Pathetic.
[quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: Now maybe we can have driverless trains.[/p][/quote]Pathetic. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 11

12:51pm Tue 11 Mar 14

T. Watts says...

TTMAN = Sad little man.

Despite what you think of him, he still acheived more in one day than you'll ever achieve in a lifetime...
TTMAN = Sad little man. Despite what you think of him, he still acheived more in one day than you'll ever achieve in a lifetime... T. Watts
  • Score: 14

1:34pm Tue 11 Mar 14

The man who fell to Earth. says...

£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.
£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist. The man who fell to Earth.
  • Score: 3

2:00pm Tue 11 Mar 14

T. Watts says...

The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.
Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags.

Try harder.
[quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: £145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.[/p][/quote]Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags. Try harder. T. Watts
  • Score: -3

2:09pm Tue 11 Mar 14

TTMAN says...

Don't you just love it when people comment about your achievements when they have not a clue what they are talking about.

He caused misery to thousands of people by blackmail.
Don't you just love it when people comment about your achievements when they have not a clue what they are talking about. He caused misery to thousands of people by blackmail. TTMAN
  • Score: -12

2:12pm Tue 11 Mar 14

TTMAN says...

T. Watts wrote:
TTMAN = Sad little man.

Despite what you think of him, he still acheived more in one day than you'll ever achieve in a lifetime...
Happy at the moment about life, to describe me as small whether in stature or mind is so wide of the mark
[quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: TTMAN = Sad little man. Despite what you think of him, he still acheived more in one day than you'll ever achieve in a lifetime...[/p][/quote]Happy at the moment about life, to describe me as small whether in stature or mind is so wide of the mark TTMAN
  • Score: -5

2:25pm Tue 11 Mar 14

The man who fell to Earth. says...

T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.
Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags.

Try harder.
Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........
[quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: £145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.[/p][/quote]Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags. Try harder.[/p][/quote]Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?......... The man who fell to Earth.
  • Score: -3

3:03pm Tue 11 Mar 14

T. Watts says...

TTMAN wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
TTMAN = Sad little man.

Despite what you think of him, he still acheived more in one day than you'll ever achieve in a lifetime...
Happy at the moment about life, to describe me as small whether in stature or mind is so wide of the mark
Happy are you? Well they do say ignorance is bliss...
[quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: TTMAN = Sad little man. Despite what you think of him, he still acheived more in one day than you'll ever achieve in a lifetime...[/p][/quote]Happy at the moment about life, to describe me as small whether in stature or mind is so wide of the mark[/p][/quote]Happy are you? Well they do say ignorance is bliss... T. Watts
  • Score: 2

3:04pm Tue 11 Mar 14

T. Watts says...

The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.
Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags.

Try harder.
Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........
Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...
[quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: £145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.[/p][/quote]Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags. Try harder.[/p][/quote]Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........[/p][/quote]Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think... T. Watts
  • Score: -2

3:15pm Tue 11 Mar 14

The man who fell to Earth. says...

T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.
Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags.

Try harder.
Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........
Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...
Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think.
[quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: £145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.[/p][/quote]Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags. Try harder.[/p][/quote]Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........[/p][/quote]Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...[/p][/quote]Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think. The man who fell to Earth.
  • Score: 3

3:22pm Tue 11 Mar 14

TTMAN says...

Ha ha the DM haters are out.
Ha ha the DM haters are out. TTMAN
  • Score: -5

4:12pm Tue 11 Mar 14

villager1 says...

Let's hope the operators of the Pearly Gates or the Gates of Hell are on strike! that would be payback!
Let's hope the operators of the Pearly Gates or the Gates of Hell are on strike! that would be payback! villager1
  • Score: 1

4:48pm Tue 11 Mar 14

T. Watts says...

The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.
Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags.

Try harder.
Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........
Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...
Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think.
As Billy Bragg so eloquently put it: 'There's nothing worse than a working class Conservative'.
[quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: £145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.[/p][/quote]Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags. Try harder.[/p][/quote]Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........[/p][/quote]Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...[/p][/quote]Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think.[/p][/quote]As Billy Bragg so eloquently put it: 'There's nothing worse than a working class Conservative'. T. Watts
  • Score: 3

4:49pm Tue 11 Mar 14

T. Watts says...

TTMAN wrote:
Ha ha the DM haters are out.
No, only the TTMan haters...
[quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: Ha ha the DM haters are out.[/p][/quote]No, only the TTMan haters... T. Watts
  • Score: 2

4:53pm Tue 11 Mar 14

SillyCnut says...

T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.
Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags.

Try harder.
Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........
Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...
Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think.
As Billy Bragg so eloquently put it: 'There's nothing worse than a working class Conservative'.
Billy Bragg who lives in lovely comfortable white middle class Dorset?
[quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: £145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.[/p][/quote]Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags. Try harder.[/p][/quote]Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........[/p][/quote]Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...[/p][/quote]Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think.[/p][/quote]As Billy Bragg so eloquently put it: 'There's nothing worse than a working class Conservative'.[/p][/quote]Billy Bragg who lives in lovely comfortable white middle class Dorset? SillyCnut
  • Score: 3

6:27pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Villagecranberry says...

SillyCnut wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.
Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags.

Try harder.
Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........
Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...
Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think.
As Billy Bragg so eloquently put it: 'There's nothing worse than a working class Conservative'.
Billy Bragg who lives in lovely comfortable white middle class Dorset?
Wapping I believe?
[quote][p][bold]SillyCnut[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: £145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.[/p][/quote]Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags. Try harder.[/p][/quote]Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........[/p][/quote]Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...[/p][/quote]Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think.[/p][/quote]As Billy Bragg so eloquently put it: 'There's nothing worse than a working class Conservative'.[/p][/quote]Billy Bragg who lives in lovely comfortable white middle class Dorset?[/p][/quote]Wapping I believe? Villagecranberry
  • Score: 2

7:15pm Tue 11 Mar 14

chingforde4 says...

Rest In Peace Bob Crow. My sincerest condolences to the family.
Rest In Peace Bob Crow. My sincerest condolences to the family. chingforde4
  • Score: 10

8:42pm Tue 11 Mar 14

GlennW says...

As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of.

By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.
As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible. GlennW
  • Score: 1

11:28pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Villagecranberry says...

SillyCnut wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
The man who fell to Earth. wrote:
£145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.
Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags.

Try harder.
Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........
Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...
Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think.
As Billy Bragg so eloquently put it: 'There's nothing worse than a working class Conservative'.
Billy Bragg who lives in lovely comfortable white middle class Dorset?
Nothing worse than a Champagne Socialist either. He did what he was employed to do, he improved the pay vastly of his members and their work conditions. He received great enumeration for doing so also. He seemed to be a man of principles. He enjoyed watching Millwall and having a few pints with his mates. He could afford a nice lifestyle because he lived in social housing without a 400k mortgage around his neck. It has been asked why should he be living in that house on such a great salary. The answer is to blame the system not him.

I did not agree with any of his views generally except for his pro-stance of of the death penalty. What was upsetting in my view and let his true colours shine through was his unnecessary vilification of Thatcher on her demise. She would never have stooped to that level as Boris Johnson has not today. That is the difference. He spoke his mind yes, but had no class or diplomacy.

All said, I hope his family receive all the support they need at this time.
[quote][p][bold]SillyCnut[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The man who fell to Earth.[/bold] wrote: £145,000 a year + "perks" & still lived in a council house thus depriving a family on much less money a home. A true socialist.[/p][/quote]Yes, because to be a Socialist you have to live in a hole in the ground and walk around in rags. Try harder.[/p][/quote]Try harder you say, that's the point. Under the likes of Bob Crow, you work less to get more when working on the underground, whilst Joe Bloggs puts up with pointless strikes arguing about the inevitable. Perhaps you were being ironic?.........[/p][/quote]Here's a thought: why not try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting what the Daily Mail tells you to think...[/p][/quote]Radio 4 this very day! Not The Mail, so carrying on in your train (excuse the unintended pun) of thought, try thinking about the issues involved instead of blindly quoting the Mirror or Socialist Worker, which is such an obvious oxymoron, tells you to think.[/p][/quote]As Billy Bragg so eloquently put it: 'There's nothing worse than a working class Conservative'.[/p][/quote]Billy Bragg who lives in lovely comfortable white middle class Dorset?[/p][/quote]Nothing worse than a Champagne Socialist either. He did what he was employed to do, he improved the pay vastly of his members and their work conditions. He received great enumeration for doing so also. He seemed to be a man of principles. He enjoyed watching Millwall and having a few pints with his mates. He could afford a nice lifestyle because he lived in social housing without a 400k mortgage around his neck. It has been asked why should he be living in that house on such a great salary. The answer is to blame the system not him. I did not agree with any of his views generally except for his pro-stance of of the death penalty. What was upsetting in my view and let his true colours shine through was his unnecessary vilification of Thatcher on her demise. She would never have stooped to that level as Boris Johnson has not today. That is the difference. He spoke his mind yes, but had no class or diplomacy. All said, I hope his family receive all the support they need at this time. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 10

10:03am Wed 12 Mar 14

Paul Skinner says...

GlennW wrote:
As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of.

By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.
Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.
[quote][p][bold]GlennW[/bold] wrote: As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.[/p][/quote]Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable. Paul Skinner
  • Score: 1

10:05am Wed 12 Mar 14

Paul Skinner says...

(And the Victoria and Jubilee lines too, which are both GoA2)
(And the Victoria and Jubilee lines too, which are both GoA2) Paul Skinner
  • Score: 3

10:42am Wed 12 Mar 14

tjm01 says...

Not one of Bob Crows supporters but you have to admit he was good at his job, he protected his members and maintained safe working conditions, he also fought to ensure his members wages were not eroded by inflation, I did'nt agree with the way he went about things but never the less both he and his family deserve respect at his sad passing
Not one of Bob Crows supporters but you have to admit he was good at his job, he protected his members and maintained safe working conditions, he also fought to ensure his members wages were not eroded by inflation, I did'nt agree with the way he went about things but never the less both he and his family deserve respect at his sad passing tjm01
  • Score: 3

11:49am Wed 12 Mar 14

John001 says...

Paul Skinner wrote:
GlennW wrote:
As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of.

By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.
Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.
Sorry, but you are talking rubbish.

I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains.

Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver??
[quote][p][bold]Paul Skinner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GlennW[/bold] wrote: As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.[/p][/quote]Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you are talking rubbish. I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains. Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver?? John001
  • Score: 2

1:05pm Wed 12 Mar 14

GlennW says...

I did not say automatically driven drains, I said driverless, the term Boris uses. Boris has also said that LUL will never order another train with a drivers cab while he is Mayor. The Underground just celebrated its 150th birthday. We are talking about equiping old lines while they remain open for traffic. The 'lies' I'm peddling are those of rail industry experts and commentators. If LUL wait untill they can order trains without drivers cabs, trains on the Bakerloo and the Piccadilly Lines will be at least 60 years old and the those on the Central will be getting a bit long in the tooth as well!
I did not say automatically driven drains, I said driverless, the term Boris uses. Boris has also said that LUL will never order another train with a drivers cab while he is Mayor. The Underground just celebrated its 150th birthday. We are talking about equiping old lines while they remain open for traffic. The 'lies' I'm peddling are those of rail industry experts and commentators. If LUL wait untill they can order trains without drivers cabs, trains on the Bakerloo and the Piccadilly Lines will be at least 60 years old and the those on the Central will be getting a bit long in the tooth as well! GlennW
  • Score: 2

1:25pm Wed 12 Mar 14

Ferdy54 says...

I'll just miss him saying "London Undergrand" :-)
I'll just miss him saying "London Undergrand" :-) Ferdy54
  • Score: 1

1:27pm Wed 12 Mar 14

Paul Skinner says...

John001 wrote:
Paul Skinner wrote:
GlennW wrote:
As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of.

By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.
Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.
Sorry, but you are talking rubbish.

I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains.

Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver??
Quite correct. I did not claim that the current trains are perfect, I said they are automated. Neither did I claim the current stock are capable of being driverless. The Central line stock is from 1992/3 and advancements in technology are like night and day since then. To suggest that it will take another 20 odd years for the ability to have driverless (yes, driverless) trains is preposterous. Copenhagen Metro already has exactly this, and that itself is from 2002, over a decade ago. The point here being not that there will be no-one on board necessarily (though personally I don't rule that out), but that it will require a less-skilled worker, and therefore a lower paid one.
[quote][p][bold]John001[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paul Skinner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GlennW[/bold] wrote: As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.[/p][/quote]Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you are talking rubbish. I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains. Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver??[/p][/quote]Quite correct. I did not claim that the current trains are perfect, I said they are automated. Neither did I claim the current stock are capable of being driverless. The Central line stock is from 1992/3 and advancements in technology are like night and day since then. To suggest that it will take another 20 odd years for the ability to have driverless (yes, driverless) trains is preposterous. Copenhagen Metro already has exactly this, and that itself is from 2002, over a decade ago. The point here being not that there will be no-one on board necessarily (though personally I don't rule that out), but that it will require a less-skilled worker, and therefore a lower paid one. Paul Skinner
  • Score: 0

1:34pm Wed 12 Mar 14

Paul Skinner says...

GlennW wrote:
I did not say automatically driven drains, I said driverless, the term Boris uses. Boris has also said that LUL will never order another train with a drivers cab while he is Mayor. The Underground just celebrated its 150th birthday. We are talking about equiping old lines while they remain open for traffic. The 'lies' I'm peddling are those of rail industry experts and commentators. If LUL wait untill they can order trains without drivers cabs, trains on the Bakerloo and the Piccadilly Lines will be at least 60 years old and the those on the Central will be getting a bit long in the tooth as well!
"Boris has also said that LUL will never order another train with a drivers cab while he is Mayor."

Note: Boris is not running for another term. Therefore it is pretty likely to be factually correct.
[quote][p][bold]GlennW[/bold] wrote: I did not say automatically driven drains, I said driverless, the term Boris uses. Boris has also said that LUL will never order another train with a drivers cab while he is Mayor. The Underground just celebrated its 150th birthday. We are talking about equiping old lines while they remain open for traffic. The 'lies' I'm peddling are those of rail industry experts and commentators. If LUL wait untill they can order trains without drivers cabs, trains on the Bakerloo and the Piccadilly Lines will be at least 60 years old and the those on the Central will be getting a bit long in the tooth as well![/p][/quote]"Boris has also said that LUL will never order another train with a drivers cab while he is Mayor." Note: Boris is not running for another term. Therefore it is pretty likely to be factually correct. Paul Skinner
  • Score: -1

4:47pm Wed 12 Mar 14

John001 says...

Paul Skinner wrote:
John001 wrote:
Paul Skinner wrote:
GlennW wrote:
As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of.

By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.
Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.
Sorry, but you are talking rubbish.

I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains.

Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver??
Quite correct. I did not claim that the current trains are perfect, I said they are automated. Neither did I claim the current stock are capable of being driverless. The Central line stock is from 1992/3 and advancements in technology are like night and day since then. To suggest that it will take another 20 odd years for the ability to have driverless (yes, driverless) trains is preposterous. Copenhagen Metro already has exactly this, and that itself is from 2002, over a decade ago. The point here being not that there will be no-one on board necessarily (though personally I don't rule that out), but that it will require a less-skilled worker, and therefore a lower paid one.
To quote you directly: "Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them." You then went on to talk about the Central Line.

Your assertion that a railway operative on a 'driverless' train will be "a less-skilled worker" is also erroneous. Any rail operative in such a position will need to be a fully-trained driver in order that they may take manual control of the train in cases of emergency.

Another point worth making is that so-called 'driverless' trains will NOT necessarily eradicate strikes on London Underground. It has been established that a rail operative must be on board for safety reasons, and if these operatives choose to walk out for whatever reason, then the system will be brought to a standstill just the same.
[quote][p][bold]Paul Skinner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John001[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paul Skinner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GlennW[/bold] wrote: As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.[/p][/quote]Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you are talking rubbish. I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains. Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver??[/p][/quote]Quite correct. I did not claim that the current trains are perfect, I said they are automated. Neither did I claim the current stock are capable of being driverless. The Central line stock is from 1992/3 and advancements in technology are like night and day since then. To suggest that it will take another 20 odd years for the ability to have driverless (yes, driverless) trains is preposterous. Copenhagen Metro already has exactly this, and that itself is from 2002, over a decade ago. The point here being not that there will be no-one on board necessarily (though personally I don't rule that out), but that it will require a less-skilled worker, and therefore a lower paid one.[/p][/quote]To quote you directly: "Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them." You then went on to talk about the Central Line. Your assertion that a railway operative on a 'driverless' train will be "a less-skilled worker" is also erroneous. Any rail operative in such a position will need to be a fully-trained driver in order that they may take manual control of the train in cases of emergency. Another point worth making is that so-called 'driverless' trains will NOT necessarily eradicate strikes on London Underground. It has been established that a rail operative must be on board for safety reasons, and if these operatives choose to walk out for whatever reason, then the system will be brought to a standstill just the same. John001
  • Score: 2

5:48am Thu 13 Mar 14

VillageIdiot69 says...

GlennW wrote:
As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of.

By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.
Hasn't the DLR been running driverless trains for the last 20 years or so ?
[quote][p][bold]GlennW[/bold] wrote: As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.[/p][/quote]Hasn't the DLR been running driverless trains for the last 20 years or so ? VillageIdiot69
  • Score: 4

7:47am Thu 13 Mar 14

TTMAN says...

Says it all really.

http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/debate/articl
e-2579743/MAX-HASTIN
GS-A-tragic-death-ye
s-But-sanity-sanctif
ying-Bob-Crow.html
Says it all really. http://www.dailymail .co.uk/debate/articl e-2579743/MAX-HASTIN GS-A-tragic-death-ye s-But-sanity-sanctif ying-Bob-Crow.html TTMAN
  • Score: 0

11:50am Thu 13 Mar 14

GlennW says...

VillageIdiot69 wrote:
GlennW wrote: As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.
Hasn't the DLR been running driverless trains for the last 20 years or so ?
No. The DLR has a 'Train Captain' who rides inside the train. There is a control panel by each set of doors. The Train Captain switches in a control panel to open and close the train doors and start the train. If there is a problem with the train's equipment or the track mounted signalling equipment the Train Captain has to make his or her way to the front of the train and use the normally locked control desk to drive the train.
[quote][p][bold]VillageIdiot69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GlennW[/bold] wrote: As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.[/p][/quote]Hasn't the DLR been running driverless trains for the last 20 years or so ?[/p][/quote]No. The DLR has a 'Train Captain' who rides inside the train. There is a control panel by each set of doors. The Train Captain switches in a control panel to open and close the train doors and start the train. If there is a problem with the train's equipment or the track mounted signalling equipment the Train Captain has to make his or her way to the front of the train and use the normally locked control desk to drive the train. GlennW
  • Score: -1

1:20pm Thu 13 Mar 14

stickmanny says...

Yep and boot me off the front seat. I hate it when that happens.

Bob was awesome. He cared about people. Boris cares about money.
Yep and boot me off the front seat. I hate it when that happens. Bob was awesome. He cared about people. Boris cares about money. stickmanny
  • Score: 3

5:06pm Thu 13 Mar 14

TTMAN says...

He cared about himself and his power. His strikes bought misery to people from all walks of life. He considered life as a class struggle, not sure he was sane?
He cared about himself and his power. His strikes bought misery to people from all walks of life. He considered life as a class struggle, not sure he was sane? TTMAN
  • Score: -4

6:57pm Thu 13 Mar 14

Paul Skinner says...

John001 wrote:
Paul Skinner wrote:
John001 wrote:
Paul Skinner wrote:
GlennW wrote:
As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of.

By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.
Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.
Sorry, but you are talking rubbish.

I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains.

Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver??
Quite correct. I did not claim that the current trains are perfect, I said they are automated. Neither did I claim the current stock are capable of being driverless. The Central line stock is from 1992/3 and advancements in technology are like night and day since then. To suggest that it will take another 20 odd years for the ability to have driverless (yes, driverless) trains is preposterous. Copenhagen Metro already has exactly this, and that itself is from 2002, over a decade ago. The point here being not that there will be no-one on board necessarily (though personally I don't rule that out), but that it will require a less-skilled worker, and therefore a lower paid one.
To quote you directly: "Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them." You then went on to talk about the Central Line.

Your assertion that a railway operative on a 'driverless' train will be "a less-skilled worker" is also erroneous. Any rail operative in such a position will need to be a fully-trained driver in order that they may take manual control of the train in cases of emergency.

Another point worth making is that so-called 'driverless' trains will NOT necessarily eradicate strikes on London Underground. It has been established that a rail operative must be on board for safety reasons, and if these operatives choose to walk out for whatever reason, then the system will be brought to a standstill just the same.
Going on to talk about the Central line, and then giving reference to it being GoA2... Sure. That means the same thing.

Anyway, as to the less skilled worker part, it is still entirely correct. It would not require a fully trained driver to take over the controls. GoA4 is capable of coping with emergency situations (again, Copenhagen Metro). At least bother to do a little bit of research, please.
[quote][p][bold]John001[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paul Skinner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John001[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paul Skinner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GlennW[/bold] wrote: As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.[/p][/quote]Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you are talking rubbish. I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains. Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver??[/p][/quote]Quite correct. I did not claim that the current trains are perfect, I said they are automated. Neither did I claim the current stock are capable of being driverless. The Central line stock is from 1992/3 and advancements in technology are like night and day since then. To suggest that it will take another 20 odd years for the ability to have driverless (yes, driverless) trains is preposterous. Copenhagen Metro already has exactly this, and that itself is from 2002, over a decade ago. The point here being not that there will be no-one on board necessarily (though personally I don't rule that out), but that it will require a less-skilled worker, and therefore a lower paid one.[/p][/quote]To quote you directly: "Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them." You then went on to talk about the Central Line. Your assertion that a railway operative on a 'driverless' train will be "a less-skilled worker" is also erroneous. Any rail operative in such a position will need to be a fully-trained driver in order that they may take manual control of the train in cases of emergency. Another point worth making is that so-called 'driverless' trains will NOT necessarily eradicate strikes on London Underground. It has been established that a rail operative must be on board for safety reasons, and if these operatives choose to walk out for whatever reason, then the system will be brought to a standstill just the same.[/p][/quote]Going on to talk about the Central line, and then giving reference to it being GoA2... Sure. That means the same thing. Anyway, as to the less skilled worker part, it is still entirely correct. It would not require a fully trained driver to take over the controls. GoA4 is capable of coping with emergency situations (again, Copenhagen Metro). At least bother to do a little bit of research, please. Paul Skinner
  • Score: -1

7:03pm Thu 13 Mar 14

GlennW says...

TTMAN wrote:
He cared about himself and his power. His strikes bought misery to people from all walks of life. He considered life as a class struggle, not sure he was sane?
They weren't 'his' strikes. They were voted for by the RMT members involved in the dispute. All postal ballots being counted by Electoral Reform Ballot Services. Do you think that RMT members are all robots who merely responded to Bob Crow pressing a button in Unity House by remote control?
[quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: He cared about himself and his power. His strikes bought misery to people from all walks of life. He considered life as a class struggle, not sure he was sane?[/p][/quote]They weren't 'his' strikes. They were voted for by the RMT members involved in the dispute. All postal ballots being counted by Electoral Reform Ballot Services. Do you think that RMT members are all robots who merely responded to Bob Crow pressing a button in Unity House by remote control? GlennW
  • Score: 4

7:12pm Thu 13 Mar 14

TTMAN says...

They are like many people the very reason we had a crash, it is called GREED.
They are like many people the very reason we had a crash, it is called GREED. TTMAN
  • Score: -1

9:33pm Thu 13 Mar 14

John001 says...

Paul Skinner wrote:
John001 wrote:
Paul Skinner wrote:
John001 wrote:
Paul Skinner wrote:
GlennW wrote:
As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of.

By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.
Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.
Sorry, but you are talking rubbish.

I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains.

Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver??
Quite correct. I did not claim that the current trains are perfect, I said they are automated. Neither did I claim the current stock are capable of being driverless. The Central line stock is from 1992/3 and advancements in technology are like night and day since then. To suggest that it will take another 20 odd years for the ability to have driverless (yes, driverless) trains is preposterous. Copenhagen Metro already has exactly this, and that itself is from 2002, over a decade ago. The point here being not that there will be no-one on board necessarily (though personally I don't rule that out), but that it will require a less-skilled worker, and therefore a lower paid one.
To quote you directly: "Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them." You then went on to talk about the Central Line.

Your assertion that a railway operative on a 'driverless' train will be "a less-skilled worker" is also erroneous. Any rail operative in such a position will need to be a fully-trained driver in order that they may take manual control of the train in cases of emergency.

Another point worth making is that so-called 'driverless' trains will NOT necessarily eradicate strikes on London Underground. It has been established that a rail operative must be on board for safety reasons, and if these operatives choose to walk out for whatever reason, then the system will be brought to a standstill just the same.
Going on to talk about the Central line, and then giving reference to it being GoA2... Sure. That means the same thing.

Anyway, as to the less skilled worker part, it is still entirely correct. It would not require a fully trained driver to take over the controls. GoA4 is capable of coping with emergency situations (again, Copenhagen Metro). At least bother to do a little bit of research, please.
If you are attempting to shore up your argument by mentioning the Copenhagen Metro then I suggest you do your own research. For the record, the current Copenhagen Metro only has 22 stations on the entire network, of which only 9 are below ground level and a mere 6 are defined as 'deep level' (approximately 60 feet below ground). In addition, construction of the system only began in the mid-1990's meaning that driverless operation could be factored into the operational plans during the actual construction. The London Underground is the oldest in the world, and never intended for automation. Plus a large section of the system is deep-level. Compare the deepest station on the Copenhagen Metro at 60 feet with Hampstead station on the Northern Line at 180 feet, for example. It is rather like comparing chalk with cheese. You say that a fully trained driver would not be necessary to drive the train in an emergency? Really? I think you will find that it is a requirement under Health & Safety regulations.

Bob Crow knew perfectly well that the idea was a non-starter, and he was absolutely correct. The thought of a serious incident deep underground requiring the management of several hundred passengers without someone to take responsibility is frightening. Do you recall in 2013 when a 39-tonne engineering train broke free and raced through the tunnels? A passenger train was directly in its path, and if the driver had not been able to make emergency decisions there would have been a catastrophe.

Thanks, but I would sooner put my faith in a human than in a computer.
[quote][p][bold]Paul Skinner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John001[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paul Skinner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John001[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paul Skinner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GlennW[/bold] wrote: As a local RMT branch secretary I campaigned for Bob Crow's election in 2002 and he repaid the trust the members put in him by transforming the union's finances and putting it on a sound financial footing. Bob and I were not personal friends, but he never forgot a face and he very kindly represented me at my appeal against my sacking by Network Rail four years ago, although I was one union activist that the company could and did get rid of. By the way, despite any claims by Boris, LUL cannot feasibly introduce 'driverless' tube trains until the 2030s. That is the earliest that it would be technically and financially possible.[/p][/quote]Sadly, this is also nonsense. Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them. The Central line is already automated (GoA2) requiring the driver only to operate the train in emergency situations and to (pointlessly) open and close the doors. The DLR has been automated since opening in 1987 (GoA3). So please, don't believe the lies Mr Crow fed to his members to make them believe he'd made their jobs safe. He was trying to prevent the inevitable.[/p][/quote]Sorry, but you are talking rubbish. I travel on the semi-automated Central Line regularly, and many is the time a train has stopped short of the platform and then re-started until it comes fully into its correct position. TfL will not tell you this, but when this happens it means that the computer system has failed to bring the train to its correct point, whereupon the driver has had to switch off the system and bring the train in manually. If there was no driver on the train it would be stuck until the system could be re-booted remotely, and thereby backing up trains on the entire line. I also regularly travel on the semi-automated Jubilee Line and DLR, and both of these also break down on a semi-regular basis, requiring drivers to take over the running of the trains. Bob Crow was telling the TRUTH. Even TfL admit that somebody needs to be on the train for safety reasons. In that case, surely it is simpler to just have a driver??[/p][/quote]Quite correct. I did not claim that the current trains are perfect, I said they are automated. Neither did I claim the current stock are capable of being driverless. The Central line stock is from 1992/3 and advancements in technology are like night and day since then. To suggest that it will take another 20 odd years for the ability to have driverless (yes, driverless) trains is preposterous. Copenhagen Metro already has exactly this, and that itself is from 2002, over a decade ago. The point here being not that there will be no-one on board necessarily (though personally I don't rule that out), but that it will require a less-skilled worker, and therefore a lower paid one.[/p][/quote]To quote you directly: "Driverless trains are possible, and indeed will be implemented. Heck, we've already got them." You then went on to talk about the Central Line. Your assertion that a railway operative on a 'driverless' train will be "a less-skilled worker" is also erroneous. Any rail operative in such a position will need to be a fully-trained driver in order that they may take manual control of the train in cases of emergency. Another point worth making is that so-called 'driverless' trains will NOT necessarily eradicate strikes on London Underground. It has been established that a rail operative must be on board for safety reasons, and if these operatives choose to walk out for whatever reason, then the system will be brought to a standstill just the same.[/p][/quote]Going on to talk about the Central line, and then giving reference to it being GoA2... Sure. That means the same thing. Anyway, as to the less skilled worker part, it is still entirely correct. It would not require a fully trained driver to take over the controls. GoA4 is capable of coping with emergency situations (again, Copenhagen Metro). At least bother to do a little bit of research, please.[/p][/quote]If you are attempting to shore up your argument by mentioning the Copenhagen Metro then I suggest you do your own research. For the record, the current Copenhagen Metro only has 22 stations on the entire network, of which only 9 are below ground level and a mere 6 are defined as 'deep level' (approximately 60 feet below ground). In addition, construction of the system only began in the mid-1990's meaning that driverless operation could be factored into the operational plans during the actual construction. The London Underground is the oldest in the world, and never intended for automation. Plus a large section of the system is deep-level. Compare the deepest station on the Copenhagen Metro at 60 feet with Hampstead station on the Northern Line at 180 feet, for example. It is rather like comparing chalk with cheese. You say that a fully trained driver would not be necessary to drive the train in an emergency? Really? I think you will find that it is a requirement under Health & Safety regulations. Bob Crow knew perfectly well that the idea was a non-starter, and he was absolutely correct. The thought of a serious incident deep underground requiring the management of several hundred passengers without someone to take responsibility is frightening. Do you recall in 2013 when a 39-tonne engineering train broke free and raced through the tunnels? A passenger train was directly in its path, and if the driver had not been able to make emergency decisions there would have been a catastrophe. Thanks, but I would sooner put my faith in a human than in a computer. John001
  • Score: 7

1:42pm Sat 15 Mar 14

stickmanny says...

TTMAN wrote:
They are like many people the very reason we had a crash, it is called GREED.
Rubbish. He helped achieve great pay and conditions for a workforce that deliver an excellent service. Big deal that people struggled to get to work a couple of days a year.
[quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: They are like many people the very reason we had a crash, it is called GREED.[/p][/quote]Rubbish. He helped achieve great pay and conditions for a workforce that deliver an excellent service. Big deal that people struggled to get to work a couple of days a year. stickmanny
  • Score: 3

9:43pm Sat 15 Mar 14

TTMAN says...

stickmanny wrote:
TTMAN wrote:
They are like many people the very reason we had a crash, it is called GREED.
Rubbish. He helped achieve great pay and conditions for a workforce that deliver an excellent service. Big deal that people struggled to get to work a couple of days a year.
Beyond contempt.
[quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: They are like many people the very reason we had a crash, it is called GREED.[/p][/quote]Rubbish. He helped achieve great pay and conditions for a workforce that deliver an excellent service. Big deal that people struggled to get to work a couple of days a year.[/p][/quote]Beyond contempt. TTMAN
  • Score: -5

5:18pm Mon 17 Mar 14

stickmanny says...

TTMAN wrote:
stickmanny wrote:
TTMAN wrote:
They are like many people the very reason we had a crash, it is called GREED.
Rubbish. He helped achieve great pay and conditions for a workforce that deliver an excellent service. Big deal that people struggled to get to work a couple of days a year.
Beyond contempt.
Beyond rubbish.
[quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]TTMAN[/bold] wrote: They are like many people the very reason we had a crash, it is called GREED.[/p][/quote]Rubbish. He helped achieve great pay and conditions for a workforce that deliver an excellent service. Big deal that people struggled to get to work a couple of days a year.[/p][/quote]Beyond contempt.[/p][/quote]Beyond rubbish. stickmanny
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree